Obama really IS a Christian
My proof? Obama’s decision to embrace Sen. Joe Lieberman with open arms reflects a love-thine-enemy attitude.
Well maybe it isn’t as lovey-dovey as all that, but it is as close as one can get in politics.
Despite the fact that Sen. Lieberman campaigned for Sen. John McCain in the Presidential campaign, President-elect Obama has expressed that Sen. Lieberman should still caucus with the Democrats. Former President Clinton has agreed, and has made calls to Democrats encouraging them not to ostracize Lieberman. So why this Christian-like, Gandhi-esque turning-of-the-other-cheek? Why not burn Lieberman in effigy for not backing the wildly popular Obama, the first Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter to win the popular vote, the candidate who gave McCain an electoral-vote-spanking on November 4?
The answer is at least twofold. First, Sen. Lieberman wasn’t supporting an arch-enemy of the Democratic party. As divisive and disastrous as his campaign was, Sen. McCain has a long record of getting along with Democrats. It is not as if Lieberman ran around cavorting with a Ted Stevens or a Trent Lott or a George W. Bush.
Before the Palin selection, the campaign-suspension, the “the fundamentals of our economy are strong” gaffe and the other little disasters that basically ended the McCain campaign, McCain wasn’t an easy candidate for some Democrats to run against. Reportedly after her primary loss, Sen. Hillary Clinton and McCain had a long, loving conversation; they’ve been described as political war buddies who share deep respect for each other. McCain has long supported campaign finance reform and has more recently expressed support for pro-environmental policies. McCain has supported federal funding for stem cell research (though not without hesitation). McCain himself probably won’t be an enemy of the Obama administration, so Lieberman probably shouldn’t be turned into one, either.
The other reason Lieberman isn’t being punished for his decision to support McCain is that despite the sweeping Democratic victory on November 4, Obama will need as many Senators and Congresspersons as possible to back his initiatives (first and foremost, his economic plans). The decisions that will be required of Obama are going to be tough and may not win popular support. Digging our country out of its dire economic straits may require even more expensive economic stimuli, and Obama has indicated that he plans to push at least one more bailout package, one that will help Americans affected by the mortgage crisis. Working to bring people together—including his political opponents—is a good way to start building support. Ultimately, Obama would only hurt himself by ostracizing Lieberman.
Since Obama’s victory on November 4, some in pundit land have posed the question of whether Obama will be able to pull the country along with him in an ideological way, as Reagan did during the 80s. But before he can begin to pull the country anywhere, Obama has to bring people together—that, really, has been his primary campaign promise. Extending an olive branch to Lieberman is a good start.
Monday, November 10, 2008
An Oldie but a Goodie
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1004001-1,00.html
This is a very astute piece from back in 2003, when Senator Trent Lott was ostracized by his own party leadership for his comments praising Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat Presidential campaign. Though I hesitate to give credit to the modern Republican party for working in any active way to resolve racial divides, I do believe that the Bush Administration has symbolically improved the status of African Americans. He appointed both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice to serve as Secretary of State; Rice also served as National Security Advisor. Both had very high-profile positions; they were always in the newspapers and on TV as representatives of the Bush administration both at home and abroad. It may be that Powell and Rice have helped to make some Americans and world leaders feel more comfortable with the idea of African Americans serving in high offices; Powell and Rice may have helped lessened latent and blatant racism in the United States and around the world. Perhaps their high-profile involvement in the Bush Administration for the past eight years helped--at least symbolically--to prepare America and the world for Obama's candidacy, his victory and his Presidency.
This is a very astute piece from back in 2003, when Senator Trent Lott was ostracized by his own party leadership for his comments praising Strom Thurmond's Dixiecrat Presidential campaign. Though I hesitate to give credit to the modern Republican party for working in any active way to resolve racial divides, I do believe that the Bush Administration has symbolically improved the status of African Americans. He appointed both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice to serve as Secretary of State; Rice also served as National Security Advisor. Both had very high-profile positions; they were always in the newspapers and on TV as representatives of the Bush administration both at home and abroad. It may be that Powell and Rice have helped to make some Americans and world leaders feel more comfortable with the idea of African Americans serving in high offices; Powell and Rice may have helped lessened latent and blatant racism in the United States and around the world. Perhaps their high-profile involvement in the Bush Administration for the past eight years helped--at least symbolically--to prepare America and the world for Obama's candidacy, his victory and his Presidency.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Reverse Bradley Effect
Some have suggested that an Obama victory on November 4 could be derailed by the emergence of the “Bradley effect,” hearkening back to the 1982 California Governor’s race where Tom Bradley, an African American candidate, polled high but ultimately scored low with voters and lost the election. Many attributed Bradley’s loss to the idea that while most Californians said publicly that they would vote for Bradley, they couldn’t bring themselves to actually vote for an African American man once the polling station curtain closed behind them.
I have for several months now felt that America might see the Bradley effect in this election—but this time, in reverse. Many Americans in conservative parts of the country may nod their heads in agreement with their families, friends and fellow churchgoers who express support for the Republican ticket and/or disdain for the Democratic ticket and Mr. Obama specifically.
But once they duck into their polling place, they are free to vote for Obama, and nobody will ever know their secret.
My largely instinctive belief in a reverse Bradley effect has been based on the simple reality that America is not where it was in 1982—we have entered a new era in which racism, though far from being eradicated, is not quite as pervasive, ugly or acceptable. And Mr. Obama has been campaigning for nearly two years—enough time for many early skeptics to warm to him and confidently support his candidacy. So even though a community may identify as conservative, there may be a critical mass of voters within those communities who are quietly supporting Obama.
I was encouraged today, when I was phonebanking to Indiana voters on behalf of the Obama campaign. Indiana of course is a "swing" state but has many conservative voters, many of which I spoke with on the phone and many of whom slammed the phone down when I said I said I am a volunteer for Obama's campaign. (One quite charming Indiana voter said he "ain't voting for no half-breed.")
However I spoke with one Indiana woman who, after I identified myself as an Obama volunteer, asked me in a low, hesitant voice “When I vote, will anyone know who I vote for?”
“No,” I replied, “The decision you make at the polling place is confidential. Nobody will ever know who you vote for.”
“Okay,” she said, sounding reassured. “Well, I plan to vote for Obama.”
This woman may express hesitance because she lives in a state that is generally a red state and she clearly has conservative McCain supporters around her. She may live among people whose identities are intertwined with being “conservative” and/or “Republican” and whose political discourse reflects this. She may not feel comfortable voicing her opinion given the political climate in which she lives. But this woman, and the people surrounding her, are also watching the news, hearing the speeches of both candidates, feeling the effects of a flailing economy and the Iraqi occupation, and in light of all of the above, at least some of them may want to vote Democratic this time around.
And they don’t have to tell anybody.
I have for several months now felt that America might see the Bradley effect in this election—but this time, in reverse. Many Americans in conservative parts of the country may nod their heads in agreement with their families, friends and fellow churchgoers who express support for the Republican ticket and/or disdain for the Democratic ticket and Mr. Obama specifically.
But once they duck into their polling place, they are free to vote for Obama, and nobody will ever know their secret.
My largely instinctive belief in a reverse Bradley effect has been based on the simple reality that America is not where it was in 1982—we have entered a new era in which racism, though far from being eradicated, is not quite as pervasive, ugly or acceptable. And Mr. Obama has been campaigning for nearly two years—enough time for many early skeptics to warm to him and confidently support his candidacy. So even though a community may identify as conservative, there may be a critical mass of voters within those communities who are quietly supporting Obama.
I was encouraged today, when I was phonebanking to Indiana voters on behalf of the Obama campaign. Indiana of course is a "swing" state but has many conservative voters, many of which I spoke with on the phone and many of whom slammed the phone down when I said I said I am a volunteer for Obama's campaign. (One quite charming Indiana voter said he "ain't voting for no half-breed.")
However I spoke with one Indiana woman who, after I identified myself as an Obama volunteer, asked me in a low, hesitant voice “When I vote, will anyone know who I vote for?”
“No,” I replied, “The decision you make at the polling place is confidential. Nobody will ever know who you vote for.”
“Okay,” she said, sounding reassured. “Well, I plan to vote for Obama.”
This woman may express hesitance because she lives in a state that is generally a red state and she clearly has conservative McCain supporters around her. She may live among people whose identities are intertwined with being “conservative” and/or “Republican” and whose political discourse reflects this. She may not feel comfortable voicing her opinion given the political climate in which she lives. But this woman, and the people surrounding her, are also watching the news, hearing the speeches of both candidates, feeling the effects of a flailing economy and the Iraqi occupation, and in light of all of the above, at least some of them may want to vote Democratic this time around.
And they don’t have to tell anybody.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Valuable critique of the Obama campaign, but no praise for Mr. Bush
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/23/syed.muslim/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
While she makes valid points, the author's praise for Mr. Bush's decision to visit mosques and otherwise campaign with Muslim Americans neglects that such campaigning has been self-serving, while his policy decisions have hurt Muslims in America and around the world. And, as Gen. Powell stated, the Republican party has fomented hatred and fear against Muslim Americans. I don't defend Mr. Obama's decision to keep Muslim Americans at bay, but I do believe the substance of his policies and his leadership generally will help Muslim Americans and all racial and religious minorities in America.
While she makes valid points, the author's praise for Mr. Bush's decision to visit mosques and otherwise campaign with Muslim Americans neglects that such campaigning has been self-serving, while his policy decisions have hurt Muslims in America and around the world. And, as Gen. Powell stated, the Republican party has fomented hatred and fear against Muslim Americans. I don't defend Mr. Obama's decision to keep Muslim Americans at bay, but I do believe the substance of his policies and his leadership generally will help Muslim Americans and all racial and religious minorities in America.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Eugene Jarecki's "The American Way of War"
Eventually I will write a review of this book, but for now, I want to spread the word.
http://www.amazon.com/American-Way-War-Missiles-Misguided/dp/1416544569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224624174&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/American-Way-War-Missiles-Misguided/dp/1416544569/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1224624174&sr=1-1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)